logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 안산지원 2016.09.06 2016고단2511
교통사고처리특례법위반
Text

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of two million won.

If the defendant does not pay the above fine, the amount of KRW 100,000 shall be paid.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

The Defendant is a person who drives B&C rocketing vehicles.

On June 24, 2016, the Defendant driven the above vehicle on June 13:16, and led the road front of the 16 Chungcheong elementary school in the luxan-ro of the luxan city to proceed at a speed below the speed of vision, depending on two lanes between the two lanes in the direction of the lux Park in the direction of the luxan Library.

Since there are children's protection zones and crosswalks where signal lights are installed, the driver engaged in driving service has a duty of care to check whether there is a person who gets on a way by reducing speed and checking the right and the right and the right and the right and the right of the driver, and to drive safely according to the new code.

Nevertheless, due to negligence of disregarding that the vehicle driving signal is a stop signal, it was found that the victim D(7 years old) who crossed the crosswalk from the right-hand side of the melting vehicle by leaving the crosswalk from the left-hand side of the melting vehicle and immediately discovered it, and the front front door of the above vehicle received the inside part of the above victim.

Ultimately, the Defendant suffered injury to the victim by negligence in the above business, i.e., a bad influence that requires approximately four weeks of medical treatment.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes of a medical certificate;

1. Article 3 (1), the proviso to Article 3 (2) 1, 6, and 11 of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents concerning Criminal Facts, and Article 268 of the Criminal Act;

1. The reason for sentencing under Articles 70(1) and 69(2) of the Criminal Act is that the content of the instant crime does not seem to be negligible. However, the Defendant appears to have led to the confession and reflect of the instant crime, the Defendant’s vehicle can be helpful for recovery of damage to the victim due to being subscribed to a comprehensive motor vehicle insurance, the Defendant agreed with the victim after the instant indictment, and the victim does not want the Defendant’s punishment, and the Defendant has no record of the same crime.

arrow